this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
565 points (98.0% liked)

politics

19240 readers
2945 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Before the 1960s, it was really hard to get divorced in America.

Typically, the only way to do it was to convince a judge that your spouse had committed some form of wrongdoing, like adultery, abandonment, or “cruelty” (that is, abuse). This could be difficult: “Even if you could prove you had been hit, that didn’t necessarily mean it rose to the level of cruelty that justified a divorce,” said Marcia Zug, a family law professor at the University of South Carolina.

Then came a revolution: In 1969, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan of California (who was himself divorced) signed the nation’s first no-fault divorce law, allowing people to end their marriages without proving they’d been wronged. The move was a recognition that “people were going to get out of marriages,” Zug said, and gave them a way to do that without resorting to subterfuge. Similar laws soon swept the country, and rates of domestic violence and spousal murder began to drop as people — especially women — gained more freedom to leave dangerous situations. 

Today, however, a counter-revolution is brewing: Conservative commentators and lawmakers are calling for an end to no-fault divorce, arguing that it has harmed men and even destroyed the fabric of society. Oklahoma state Sen. Dusty Deevers, for example, introduced a bill in January to ban his state’s version of no-fault divorce. The Texas Republican Party added a call to end the practice to its 2022 platform (the plank is preserved in the 2024 version). Federal lawmakers like Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) and House Speaker Mike Johnson, as well as former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, have spoken out in favor of tightening divorce laws.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] djsoren19@yiffit.net 86 points 6 months ago (1 children)

When Ronald fucking Reagan is too liberal for your party, I think it's time for self-examination.

[–] kava@lemmy.world -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Republicans today are not the same as Republicans back then. Reagan did more for illegal immigrants than any president since. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat if it was him versus the two bad jokes currently campaigning.

[–] Jomega@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago (2 children)

He also ignored the AIDS epidemic on purpose, leaving thousands to die simply because he didn't like gay people.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Not a good thing but thousands of gays vs millions of illegals

[–] Jomega@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ten thousand premeditated murders via deliberate inaction is not balanced out by a million visas granted. The severity of the crime gives it more weight. A life extinguished does not equal a life improved somewhat.

[–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I understand and ultimately it's impossible to quantify and compare these things. I'm not trying to defend his AIDs policies. I just grew up as an illegal and I understand what it's like living in fear.

You see a police officer and you immediately get a flight or fight response. You need to find roundabout ways to get jobs, finance a car, or rent apartments. You never know if ICE will just show up to your house one day. Or if you pick up a family member from the airport and they ask for your papers (my old boss got deported that way. His girlfriend's niece came to stay a week. He went to pick her up. CBP was waiting with her to get documents from whoever came to pick her up)

You have to pay taxes but you don't get to apply for things everyone else does. You wanna go to community College? Tough shit, you don't qualify for instate tuition so you're paying 3x the normal price. Even if you've lived there for 15 years and did your entire elementary / high school in the state. You're American in all ways except one- documents

Etc etc

There are over 10 million, I think around 13 million people living just like that.

And Trump is awful. But Biden pretended like he would do something, he promised immigration reform. Promised to halt construction of the wall. Instead he expands construction and the next day does a photoshoot at the border with CBP. Month or two ago he actually used the term "illegals"

Which in my opinion isn't a big deal but for a lot of people showed how far right he has shifted

That's why I brought up Reagan. He gave millions of illegals amnesty and essentially removed a constant anxiety and lifted up a people that were all hiding in the shadows.

No president has done anything like that. Obama is probably second place because of DACA. I would vote for him again in a heartbeat.

So yeah I understand Reagan did the AIDs thing not trying to diminish it although we are essentially picking between people who have all done awful things. Biden went and publicly bent the knee to Israel at the start of their invasion. Trump I don't think I even need to elaborate on

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 months ago

That sounds familiar...